Community call to action: Addressing safety and planning for battery storage sites

[The Nov. 21] issue of the TBR Port Times Record was rife with thought-provoking Letters to the Editor from our neighbors in the Three Villages regarding the proposed siting of two lithium-ion battery storage facilities in their community. These facilities, while pivotal in providing impetus toward a green energy future and away from fossil fuels, are not without the attendant public safety concerns and controversy when placed very close to residential areas. Given the proximity to neighborhoods surrounding Sheep Pasture and Old Town roads, as well as the Greenway Trail bisecting our area, many in Port Jefferson Station/Terryville are equally concerned about the process and appropriateness of the placement of these projects.

It is important to note, however, that the Savion proposal(s) are not the only activity which can impact our hamlet. Since July, there has been a pending application at 1575 Route 112 for a 10-megawatt storage site by New Leaf Energy which is adjacent to the Sagamore Condominium complex and a stone’s throw from the back of Comsewogue High School. It is our intention at our next Civic Association meeting Dec. 17 (7 p.m. at the Comsewogue Public Library) to have representatives of this organization address our membership which is open to any PJS/Terryville resident. I would urge all my neighbors to participate and educate themselves about this pressing and important topic.

Just as significant, I reiterate my plea that Brookhaven take a leadership role in helping engage the broader community of our town by way of a summit meeting bringing experts together to ensure that our citizens are informed. These storage facilities are spreading across Brookhaven since it is one of the few (perhaps only) municipality on Long Island to have not imposed a moratorium on these projects until defined criteria can be developed to ensure safety. I believe it is incumbent on our local officials to develop a Master Siting Plan to determine what safeguards and standards are necessary and what specific parcels can be identified for the proper, safe location of this activity. Having any L1 (light industrial) zoned parcel have an “as of right “ opportunity to develop this new technology could lead to an uproar of confusion as these sites proliferate. In the absence of extensive dialogue, misinformation can be spread as to how dangerous or toxic these proposals are, when a more rational discussion and analysis could lead to better public policy and a clear direction for our future.

  Ira Costell

 President, Port Jefferson Station/Terryville Civic Association

Lithium-ion batteries: A risky bet for energy storage?

As an electronics engineer, I designed several systems incorporating charging and balancing circuits for lithium-ion batteries. One of these was for the Juno mission, which was launched by NASA in 2011, arrived at Jupiter in 2016, a trip of 1.74 billion miles, and continues to be operational today. I have some familiarity with the characteristics of lithium-ion batteries, which are scheduled to be utilized in the proposed energy storage facilities in Setauket and East Setauket.

The problem with lithium-ion batteries is that they are subject to the phenomenon of thermal runaway, which produces an uncontrollable white-hot fire that cannot be extinguished by ordinary means. This fire does not require external oxygen, but is the result of an intense chemical reaction inside the battery cell. Thermal runaway can be induced in several ways, including mechanical stress, such as by impact or lightning, or by overcharging, even by a very small amount. To attain the maximum amount of stored energy, a lithium-ion battery is charged to very close to its maximum rated voltage, which is typically around 4.2 volts. If this voltage is exceeded, even very slightly, e.g., to 4.3 volts or 4.4 volts, thermal runaway may be induced, and it cannot be reversed. In a well-designed system, electronic circuits are utilized which do not allow overcharging to occur. Unfortunately, no electronic circuit is absolutely 100% failure proof. For established critical applications, including military and space, reliability calculations are performed. For each circuit, the mean time between failures (MTBF) and probability of failures per year are calculated. It would be interesting to know whether Savion can provide this analysis for this application.

Thermal runaway, and its fearsome result, is not the only problem that may be encountered, and it may not even be the worst problem. That problem is as follows: how many energy storage facilities will we need to provide uninterrupted power to all of our homes, businesses and other users, when our only source of energy becomes solar arrays and windmills? We have been told that, within a few years, all of our “fossil fuel” plants will be shut down, and all of our energy will come from the sun and wind, with batteries to fill in the gaps when the sun and wind are not cooperating. And, to make matters even worse, new AI applications on the horizon will actually cause our energy needs to double.

One would hope that our elected officials have considered this problem, and have made calculations of the amount of energy storage, and the quantity and size of the battery facilities, that will be required to prevent brownouts and blackouts, particularly during extended periods with diminished sun and wind. If they have, it would be most interesting to see them.

 George Altemose

 Setauket

What was missing from Senator Schumer’s $72 million Penn Station grant announcement

Port Jefferson LIRR riders should be concerned about some critical details that were missing from Senator Schumer’s announcement that he has secured $72 million from the United States Department of Transportation for various Penn Station capital improvements.  Is the $72 million an approved appropriation of funding that a transit agency must still develop a grant application or apply for, or is it a real grant that includes $72 million in funding to a transit agency that is now immediately available to be spent by the grant recipient?  Are these funds being administered by the Federal Transit Administration?  Is there already a Memorandum of Understanding between the MTA, LIRR, New Jersey Transit and Amtrak for administration of these funds?

How many years will it take to advance design and engineering (reviewed and approved by MTA, NYC Transit, LIRR, NJ Transit and Amtrak operations, maintenance and other departments) before the project is ready for the next phase of construction?  Design and engineering usually average 5% to 10% of a capital project cost.  Who is going to come up with the $648 to $ 684 million for construction, independent third-party engineering construction management firms to assist in oversight and contingency funding for construction bids coming in above the project cost estimator engineers estimates, contract change orders during construction due to unforeseen site conditions or late requests by LIRR, NYC Transit, NJ Transit and Amtrak operations or maintenance groups?

  Larry Penner

 Great Neck

Clarifying roles: Code officers don’t need firearms

The recent decision by the Port Jefferson Village Board to disarm code officers is a commendable step toward responsible governance and a clearer understanding of law enforcement roles within our community. This move has, understandably, ignited public discourse, revealing a critical misconception: the conflation of firearms with authority.

It’s imperative to clarify that code officers, tasked with upholding local ordinances and ensuring quality of life, operate under a strictly defined legal framework.  New York State law does not grant them the power to carry firearms.  The notion that a weapon somehow amplifies their authority is erroneous and potentially dangerous.

Introducing firearms into code enforcement scenarios unnecessarily escalates risk. It fosters an illusion of power that can lead to confrontations and undermine the essential nature of community-based code compliance.  De-escalation tactics, conflict resolution and proactive community engagement are far more effective tools for achieving the goals of code enforcement.

The Village Board’s decision wisely prioritizes these methods, fostering a safer environment for both residents and officers. By removing firearms from the equation, we encourage a less adversarial and more collaborative approach to code enforcement. This shift promotes trust and mutual respect, which are vital for a thriving community.

 Drew Biondo

Former PJ Trustee

Editor’s Note: This is a rerun of last week’s letter due to mistakes in the text. We apologize for the errors.